Tennyson v. Raemisch

Summary

Tennyson v. Raemisch (10th Cir. 2018) addresses the AEDPA one-year statute of limitations for § 2254 habeas petitions. The court held that the petition was untimely because it was filed over six years after the conviction became final, and state post-conviction motions only tolled 110 days of the limitations period. Equitable tolling was denied because ignorance of the law, limited library access, and attorney misstatements did not constitute extraordinary circumstances, and the petitioner failed to show diligent pursuit of rights. The court also rejected arguments that structural error or a competency claim could bypass the limitations period without a showing of actual innocence.

Holdings

1. The petition is untimely because the one-year AEDPA limitations period expired before the petition was filed.
2. Tennyson failed to demonstrate extraordinary circumstances or diligent pursuit of his rights to warrant equitable tolling.
3. Structural error does not constitute an allegation of actual innocence sufficient to trigger the miscarriage-of-justice exception to the AEDPA limitations period.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court correctly dismissed the § 2254 petition as untimely under AEDPA's one-year limitations period.
2. Whether Tennyson was entitled to equitable tolling of the limitations period.
3. Whether structural error in state court proceedings excuses the untimeliness.

Disposition

dismissed